Ched Evans - serious injury

[bluemoonmatt]

5. I see some suggestions that people who initially condemned Evans should apologise for doing so if his conviction is overturned. Why should they? The whole point of this process is that if the conviction no longer stands, it will have been overturned on the basis that there's new evidence that couldn't have been available for the original trial - so how could anyone have taken it into account back then? Or should everyone refrain from commenting on any jury verdict in the criminal court system just in case other evidence later emerges?

As regards to point 5, this is a very good point, however this has been a high profile case and those publically condemning him have done so quite vitriollically and despite him guilty or not having done his time have purposefully and actively sought to prevent him taking up employment in the sphere he is best placed to (football) upon release. I think given the circumstances on this occasion an apology would be warranted. But of course this is dependant on him successfully appealing.

 

[EalingBlue2]

As regards to point 5, this is a very good point, however this has been a high profile case and those publically condemning him have done so quite vitriollically and despite him guilty or not having done his time have purposefully and actively sought to prevent him taking up employment in the sphere he is best placed to (football) upon release. I think given the circumstances on this occasion an apology would be warranted. But of course this is dependant on him successfully appealing.

An apology for what? Because a fan didn't want a convicted rapist whose friends had committed further multiple crimes against the victim wouldn't be good for your club?

I happened to believe that you do your time and then you can get on with life within certain boundaries but many don't. The interesting thing on ched Evans is it is usually the right who want people punished for life but in this case it seems to be those more the opposite

 

[moomba]

I have no problem with a fan not wanting him at their club, although IMO there was a fair bit of grandstanding involved at the time when there didnt need to be.

I do have a problem with those, usually public figures, that objected to the principal of him working in football fullstop.

Certain professions have restrictions on convicted felons gaining employment, but league footballer is not one of them. If it was I wouldnt have a problem at all.

I'd be asking some of these what they have done since to change the rules to ensure everyone is treated the same, and peoples ability to rehabilitate and resume a career is based on the legal system, not who has the lobby group prepared to shout the loudest.

Surely if it was important back then when there was publicity in it, it's still important now.

 

[bluemoonmatt]

An apology for what? Because a fan didn't want a convicted rapist whose friends had committed further multiple crimes against the victim wouldn't be good for your club?

I happened to believe that you do your time and then you can get on with life within certain boundaries but many don't. The interesting thing on ched Evans is it is usually the right who want people punished for life but in this case it seems to be those more the opposite

Well the lad has served his time so technically he should be free to take up employment but has been actively prevented in doing so by a number of people whom have used their high profile and positions within sport (and I'm not only talking about Jess Ennis here) to do this. Should he now been found to be not guilty of any crime, I can't understand why anyone shouldn't seek an apology for that. Lets take Ched and this particular case out of the argument for a moment.

You Mr EB have been (wrongly) found guilty of a crime (any crime)
In doing so you have lost not only youre liberty but the ability to earn money at a time when youre earning potential is at its peak
You have been released but are being prevented getting back into work despite prospective empolyers wanting to take you on
You have been made a pariah for a lengthy period of time for merely continuing to protest youre innocence.

In these circumstances are you honestly saying you would not feel you are due an apology.

I counter all of this with a note that I'm not pro/anti evans and no assumption is made on my part and that his conviction will be quashed. I am merely talking from a viewpoint that if I had done time being called all sorts of name, prevented from maximising my life earnings etc I would be more than a bit miffed,

 

[EalingBlue2]

I have no problem with a fan not wanting him at their club, although IMO there was a fair bit of grandstanding involved at the time when there didnt need to be.

I do have a problem with those, usually public figures, that objected to the principal of him working in football fullstop.

Certain professions have restrictions on convicted felons gaining employment, but league footballer is not one of them. If it was I wouldnt have a problem at all.

I'd be asking some of these what they have done since to change the rules to ensure everyone is treated the same, and peoples ability to rehabilitate and resume a career is based on the legal system, not who has the lobby group prepared to shout the loudest.

Surely if it was important back then when there was publicity in it, it's still important now.

All fair points morally and in that sense I can't disagree - justice should be blind to all but the guilt or not guilt of a person . By that I mean who they are, what they do is irellevant.

The trouble is justice is not blind to money and this works both ways, ched is only suffering on not being able to work because he is wealthy and high profile but at the same time he only has this appeal because he is had millions to throw at this case and has actually us far more resource than the crown devoted to the trial. As such it works for him both ways.

There is a very strong argument in what you say but I think there is also a strong argument that wealth shouldn't give you the power to have a different justice to anyone else either.

My own view was always had he said sorry and moved on he may well have been playing now (I understand why he couldn't do this if he was appealing) had he also behaved differently through his website and not silently allowed harrassmemt of the victim illegally then again I think things would have been different too.

But that doesn't change the good point you make on rehabilitation which is a fundamental facet of our system

 

[EalingBlue2]

Well the lad has served his time so technically he should be free to take up employment but has been actively prevented in doing so by a number of people whom have used their high profile and positions within sport (and I'm not only talking about Jess Ennis here) to do this. Should he now been found to be not guilty of any crime, I can't understand why anyone shouldn't seek an apology for that. Lets take Ched and this particular case out of the argument for a moment.

You Mr EB have been (wrongly) found guilty of a crime (any crime)
In doing so you have lost not only youre liberty but the ability to earn money at a time when youre earning potential is at its peak
You have been released but are being prevented getting back into work despite prospective empolyers wanting to take you on
You have been made a pariah for a lengthy period of time for merely continuing to protest youre innocence.

In these circumstances are you honestly saying you would not feel you are due an apology.

I counter all of this with a note that I'm not pro/anti evans and no assumption is made on my part and that his conviction will be quashed. I am merely talking from a viewpoint that if I had done time being called all sorts of name, prevented from maximising my life earnings etc I would be more than a bit miffed,

I am not condoning people who stopped him working , I said at the time (even as someone who was very much behind the verdict) that he had to be allowed to move on once free as anyone should.

If something comes out from the appeal that someone lied, someone was incompetent or someone's actions led to an incorrect trial then they should be apologising to everyone concerned. because on the evidence presented police, jury, cps, media, public believed him guilty and on the evidence that seemed fair enough.

I am also sure any of us would fee like we deserved grovelling apologies from the world in that circumstance it doesn't mean we would be right. Anyway it's all speculation and I think there are some very separate arguments there.

 

[moomba]

My own view was always had he said sorry and moved on he may well have been playing now (I understand why he couldn't do this if he was appealing) had he also behaved differently through his website and not silently allowed harrassmemt of the victim illegally then again I think things would have been different too.

You may well be right on that, but for me this is something that should be decided by a judge.

If he'd said "you've been a twat so you're serving your full term" I would have no problem.

But the court of public opinion, with all its flaws shouldnt be a factor in someone being allowed to work for someone that is willing to employ hom or her IMO. The one proviso being that fans of a club should always be able to have a say on the running of a club.

 

[bluemoonmatt]

I am not condoning people who stopped him working , I said at the time (even as someone who was very much behind the verdict) that he had to be allowed to move on once free as anyone should.

If something comes out from the appeal that someone lied, someone was incompetent or someone's actions led to an incorrect trial then they should be apologising to everyone concerned. because on the evidence presented police, jury, cps, media, public believed him guilty and on the evidence that seemed fair enough.

I am also sure any of us would fee like we deserved grovelling apologies from the world in that circumstance it doesn't mean we would be right. Anyway it's all speculation and I think there are some very separate arguments there.

Well personally from a human point of view - If he is successful, I very much feel certain people should apologise.

 

[moomba]

The odd thing about this one at the time is that the loudest critics werent Oldham or Sheff United supporters. In many cases they werent even football supporters.

Just people that wanted an additional punishment over and above what was decided by the court.

For me that can't be right.

 

[EalingBlue2]

You may well be right on that, but for me this is something that should be decided by a judge.

If he'd said "you've been a twat so you're serving your full term" I would have no problem.

But the court of public opinion, with all its flaws shouldnt be a factor in someone being allowed to work for someone that is willing to employ hom or her IMO. The one proviso being that fans of a club should always be able to have a say on the running of a club.

It shouldn't, but in the world we live in everything is ruled by demand and public opinion in an entertainment industry is God